DOCSLIB.ORG

Report to the Future Melbourne (Planning) Committee Agenda Item 6.3

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Report to the Future Melbourne (Planning) Committee Agenda Item 6.3 Page 1 of 309 Report to the Future Melbourne (Planning) Committee Agenda item 6.3 Planning Scheme Amendment C215-Kensington Heritage Review 11 November 2014 Presenter: David Mayes, Manager Strategic Planning Purpose and background 1. The purpose of this report is to seek adoption of the final version of Amendment C215 based on the recommendations of the Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning. 2. The Panel hearing was held on 28 July 2014 and its report was received on 3 September 2014. The Panel’s report is at Attachment 2. 3. Amendment C215 proposes to apply the Heritage Overlay to new heritage precincts and individual places in Kensington, transfer a number of existing heritage places into heritage precincts and remove one existing heritage place from the Heritage Overlay. Key issues 4. Management’s response to the Panel recommendations is at Attachment 3. The Panel generally supports the Amendment subject to the removal of two properties from the exhibited Heritage Overlay. Particular changes recommended by panel to note are: 4.1. remove land identified as 1 Robertson Street from HO1163 4.2. re-instate 35 Eastwood Street into the Heritage Overlay 4.3. remove 33 Eastwood Street (front house) from the Heritage Places Inventory 4.4. amend map 4HO to exclude 14 Pridham Street, Kensington from the Heritage Overlay 5. All Panel recommendations with the exception of the re-instatement of 35 Eastwood Street into the Heritage Overlay have been accepted. The reasons for not accepting this recommendation are described in management response at Attachment 3. The revised version of Amendment C215 with the recommended changes is at Attachment 4. This is the version that management recommends be adopted by Council and presented to the Minister for Planning for approval. Recommendation from management 6. That the Future Melbourne Committee: 6.1. Notes management’s assessment of the Panel’s recommendations and subsequent revisions to Amendment C215. 6.2. Recommends that Council: 6.2.1. Adopts Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C215-Kensington Heritage Review at Attachment 4 pursuant to Section 29 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. 6.2.2. Submits Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C215-Kensington Heritage Review to the Minister for Planning for approval. Attachments: 1. Supporting Attachment 2. Amendment C215 Panel Report 3. Panel Recommendations and management response 4. Revised Amendment C215 Page 2 of 309 Attachment 1 Agenda item 6.3 Future Melbourne Committee 11 November 2014 Supporting Attachment Legal 1. Legal implications. Section 29(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Act) provides that after complying with Division 1 and 2 of the Act in respect of a planning scheme amendment, the planning authority may adopt the amendment with or without changes. Finance 2. Under Section 6 of the Planning and Environment (Fees) Regulations 2000, Council is required to pay a fee when requesting the Minister approve an amendment. Once the planning scheme amendment is approved, Council may also be required to place a notice in a newspaper circulating in the local area. These costs are provided for in the 2014-2015 budget. Conflict of interest 3. No member of Council staff, or other person engaged under a contract, involved in advising on or preparing this report has declared a direct or indirect interest in relation to the matter of the report. Stakeholder consultation 4. Amendment C215 was on public exhibition from 31 October to 8 December 2013 and a total of 12 submissions were received. 5. At its meeting on 6 May 2014, the Future Melbourne Committee resolved to request the Minister for Planning appoint an Independent Panel to hear and consider the submissions. 6. The Minister for Planning appointed a panel comprising of Suzanne Barker (Chair) and Renata Howe. The one day panel hearing was held at Planning Panels on 28 July 2014. Those in attendance at the hearing were the City of Melbourne and Mr Chris Stribley. Relation to Council policy 7. Amendment C215 is consistent with Clause 21.06-2 (Heritage) of Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement, the objective of which is to conserve and enhance places and precincts of identified heritage significance. Environmental sustainability 8. There is no impact on environmental sustainability. 1. Attachment 2 Page 3 of 309 Agenda item 6.3 Future Melbourne Committee 11 November 2014 PlanningandEnvironmentAct1987 PanelReport MelbournePlanningScheme AmendmentC215 KensingtonHeritageReview 3September2014 Page 4 of 309 PlanningandEnvironmentAct1987 PanelReportpursuanttoSection25oftheAct MelbournePlanningSchemeAmendmentC215 KensingtonHeritageReview SuzanneBarker,Chair RenateHowe,Member Page 5 of 309 MelbournePlanningSchemeAmendmentC215_PanelReport_3September2014 Contents Page ExecutiveSummary.............................................................................................................1 1 Introduction................................................................................................................2 2 TheProposal...............................................................................................................5 2.1 Backgroundtotheproposal....................................................................................5 2.2 TheAmendment......................................................................................................5 2.3 Issuesdealtwithinthisreport................................................................................8 3 StrategicPlanningContext..........................................................................................9 3.1 Policyframework.....................................................................................................9 3.2 MinisterialDirectionsandPracticeNotes.............................................................10 3.3 Otherstrategies.....................................................................................................11 3.4 StrategicAssessment.............................................................................................12 4 TheHeritagePrecincts..............................................................................................13 4.1 TheIssues..............................................................................................................13 4.2 BarnettStreetnorthresidentialprecinct(HO1162).............................................13 4.3 BarnettStreetsouthresidentialprecinct(HO1163)ͲpartformerBarnett StreetUrbanConservationArea...........................................................................14 4.4 ParsonsStreetwestprecinct(HO1167)................................................................18 4.5 PridhamStreetnorthprecinct(HO1168)..............................................................22 4.6 Kensingtonprecinct(HO9)....................................................................................25 AppendixA Listofsubmitters AppendixB Listoftableddocuments Page 6 of 309 MelbournePlanningSchemeAmendmentC215_PanelReport_3September2014 ListofTables Page Table1 PartiestothePanelHearing....................................................................................4 ListofFigures Page Figure1LandsubjecttoAmendmentC215..........................................................................3 Figure2PlanshowingproposedprecinctsandindividualHeritageOverlays......................7 Page 7 of 309 MelbournePlanningSchemeAmendmentC215_PanelReport_3September2014 AmendmentSummary TheAmendment MelbournePlanningSchemeAmendmentC215 CommonName KensingtonHeritageReview SubjectSite TheAmendmentappliestovariouspropertiesinKensington–refer toFigure1 PurposeofAmendment ImplementationofReviewofHeritageBuildingsinKensington2013 andReviewofHeritageBuildings:PercyStreet2013including: x CreatingnewHeritagePlaces(precinctsandindividualplaces) x Transferring a number of existing Heritage Places (precincts andindividualplaces)intonewprecinctsandallocatingnew HeritageOverlayreferencenumbers x RemovingoneplacefromtheHeritageOverlay x Amendinglocalpolicy x Amending the heritage gradings of some places in the IncorporatedDocument‘HeritagePlacesInventory’ x Inserting a new incorporated document with Statement of Significance. TheProponent MelbourneCityCouncil PlanningAuthority MelbourneCityCouncil Authorisation A0257316July2013 Exhibition 31Octoberto8December2013 PanelProcess ThePanel MsSuzanneBarker(Chair),AssociateProfessorRenateHowe DirectionsHearing PlanningPanelsVictoria,1SpringStreet,Melbourne,13June2014 PanelHearing PlanningPanelsVictoria,1SpringStreet,Melbourne,28July2014 SiteInspections ThePanelundertookunaccompaniedinspectionson23July2014, andothersfollowingtheHearing Appearances RefertoTable1 Submissions 12submissionsͲRefertoAppendixA DateofthisReport 3September2014 Page 8 of 309 MelbournePlanningSchemeAmendmentC215_PanelReport_3September2014 ExecutiveSummary (i) Summary TheAmendmentproposestoapplytheHeritageOverlay(HO)toanumberofnewHeritage Places(precinctsandindividualplaces),transferanumberofexistingHeritagePrecinctsand individualplacesintonewHeritagePrecincts,andremoveoneexistingHeritagePlace.The Amendmentimplementstherecommendationsoftworecentheritagereviewsundertaken byGraemeButlerandAssociatestitledTheKensingtonHeritageReview2013andtheReview ofHeritageBuildings:PercyStreet2013. Ofthe12submissionslodgedinrelationtotheAmendment,11opposedtheapplicationof theHeritageOverlayontheirland,andonewasinsupportoftheAmendment. Oppositionfromsubmittersrelatestothecompositionoftheheritageprecincts,socialand
Load more

Recommended publications
  • List of Amendments
    MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME LIST OF AMENDMENTS Amendment In operation Brief description number from VC5 25 MAR 1999 Introduces A Code of Practice for Telecommunications Facilities in Victoria, and updates Code of Practice – Private Tennis Court Development as incorporated documents, amends the gaming provisions to provide for lists of strip shopping centres where gaming is prohibited, recognises existing use rights of privatised utility service providers, defines “Railway station”, provides for vegetation removal if the vegetation has been planted for pasture or other crops, formatting and other changes arising from panel reports and operational experience. C1 30 APR 1999 Amends the Melbourne Docklands Area Planning Provisions incorporated document to introduce noise and light regime requirements for the Business Park Precinct of Melbourne Docklands and amends provisions including building height, building setbacks and land use to reflect the proposed development of the Precinct. C2 25 MAY 1999 Amends HO 422, Map 12HO to delete Building 16 & Ward 22 of the Alfred Hospital site and includes the former Royal Park Psychiatric Hospital within the Heritage Overlay HO 325, Map 2HO. C3 24 JUN 1999 The amendment corrects anomalies within the Incorporated Document – Melbourne Docklands Area Planning Provisions which refer to obsolete sections of the former Melbourne Planning Scheme, introduces a revised setback provision in all development precincts and updates the heritage provisions applying to the Victoria Harbour Precinct. C6 22 JUL 1999 The
    [Show full text]
  • Committee Report
    Page 1 of 2627 Report to the Future Melbourne (Planning) Committee Agenda item 6.6 Planning Scheme Amendment C388 8 December 2020 Shrine of Remembrance Signage (2-42 Domain Road, Melbourne) Presenter: Emma Appleton, Director City Strategy Purpose and background 1. This report recommends that the Future Melbourne Committee request the Minister for Planning (the Minister) prepare and approve Amendment C388 (Attachment 2) pursuant to section 20(4) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (the Act). 2. The Shrine of Remembrance Trustees (the Shrine Trustees) have requested changes to the Melbourne Planning Scheme (the Scheme) to allow new signage in order to encourage visitation to the Shrine of Remembrance (the Shrine) and to aid visitor orientation in the Domain Parklands and the Shrine of Remembrance Reserve (the Shrine Reserve). The new signage includes a plinth-style identification sign at the northern end of the Shrine Reserve and six (6) small banner pole signs alongside perimeter access pathways (Attachment 2). 3. The Shrine Reserve is located within the Public Park and Recreation Zone (PPRZ) in the Scheme. Under the PPRZ, the signage requirements prohibit most types of signs larger than 3 square metres. The Amendment is required in order to permit the proposed signage. 4. The Shrine Reserve is listed on the Victorian Heritage Register (VHR) and is of historical, archaeological, architectural, aesthetic and social significance to the State of Victoria. The Shrine Reserve is also included in a Heritage Overlay (HO) under the Scheme. Under the HO a planning permit is required for any sign. On a VHR property, Heritage Victoria is the issuing authority and in this instance have issued a permit for the proposed signs under the Heritage Act 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • A Biography of George William Knight
    Of Railways, Wine and Flowers: A Biography of George William Knight Robyn Hunter Bachelor of Arts (La Trobe University), Graduate Diploma of Education (La Trobe University), Master of Education Studies (Federation University) This thesis is submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Faculty of Education and the Arts Federation University P.O. Box 663 University Drive, Mount Helen Ballarat, Victoria, 3353, Australia Submitted for examination 1 May 2018 Abstract The title page photograph1 has been used for many decades as the quintessential representation of George William Knight (1832–1923), railway engineer, viticulturist, horticulturist and Bendigo Council’s building surveyor and city surveyor. He is cursorily remembered by railway, viticultural and horticultural historians and enthusiasts. However, he remained unknown by some of his descendants, including me. Yet, his contribution deserves to be recognised. Knight is representative of English, middle-class, liberal young men who flocked to Australia in the 1850s, but who did not obtain high political office or financial success. This study uses a biographical approach to explore his role in building Victoria. It examines his conflict with Bendigo councillors who could not abide his forthright stance or his refusal to acquiesce to their whims, a conflict that exploded into a vicious battle that Knight lost. Unshackled from council, he expended his huge intellectual and physical energy developing nurseries and vineyards. Yet, these battles with council are remembered, and Knight’s reputation has suffered because of them. This thesis examines misunderstandings surrounding class and reveals Knight to have been a member of the petty bourgeoisie—aspirational, yet understanding and empathetic towards working people.
    [Show full text]
  • SCHEDULE to CLAUSE 72.04 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED in THIS PLANNING C399melb SCHEME
    MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME 27/10/2020 SCHEDULE TO CLAUSE 72.04 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED IN THIS PLANNING C399melb SCHEME 1.0 Incorporated documents 14/0123/04/2021 C391melbC305melb Name of document Introduced by: 12 Riverside Quay, Southbank, November 2020 C391melb 53-57 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne Statement of Significance, July 2020 C386melb 150 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne - Australian Federal Police, Melbourne State C375melb Office, May 2020 166 Russell Street, Melbourne Statement of Significance, July 2020 C386melb 271 Spring Street, Melbourne, Transitional Arrangements, May 2016 C287 55 Southbank Boulevard, Southbank, February 2017 C288 346-376 Queen Street, 334-346 La Trobe Street and 142-171 A'Beckett Street NPS1 Open Lot Car Park, Melbourne 447 Collins Street, Melbourne, Transitional Arrangements, May 2016 C289 70 Southbank Blvd, June 2014 C239 80 Collins Street Melbourne Development, May 2013 C219 87-127 Queens Bridge Street, Southbank, July 2018 (Amended August 2020) C386melb ABC Melbourne New Office and Studio Accommodation Project (Southbank), C226 December 2013 Advertising Signs - Mercedes-Benz, 135-149 Kings Way, Southbank C103 AMP Tower and St James Building Complex Statement of Significance (527-555 C386melb Bourke Street, Melbourne), July 2020 Apartment Building Statement of Significance (13-15 Collins Street, Melbourne), C386melb July 2020 Arden Macaulay Heritage Review 2012: Statements of Significance June 2016 C207 Atlas Assurance Building Statement of Significance (404-406 Collins Street, C386melb Melbourne), July 2020
    [Show full text]
  • Capturing Chloe: Reimagining a Melbourne Icon Katrina Kell
    Capturing Chloe: Reimagining a Melbourne Icon Katrina Kell This Thesis is presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, English and Creative Writing School of Arts Murdoch University August 2018 Figure 1: Lefebvre, Jules Joseph. 1875. Chloe. oil on canvas. Melbourne: Young and Jackson Hotel. Photograph: Peter Nicholson. I declare that this thesis is my own account of my research and contains as its main content work which has not previously been submitted for a degree at any tertiary institution. The research exploring the involvement of Australian Aboriginal soldiers from Western Victoria during World War 1, and cultural consultation with Victorian artist Vicki Couzens, was approved by Murdoch University’s Human Research Ethics Committee: Approval Number 2012/168. An earlier version of the “Preface” to the exegesis was published in my peer-reviewed paper “Reimagining a Melbourne Icon: Jules Lefebvre’s Chloe” in Writing the Ghost Train: Refereed Conference Papers of the 20th Annual Australasian Association of Writing Programs Conference 2015. This paper was informed by research undertaken for my thesis, and a number of revised and expanded paragraphs from the original paper are incorporated into chapters of the exegesis, however, they only comprise a small portion of the overall thesis. ……………………………… Katrina Kell Date: 23rd August 2018 ……………………………… Abstract The nude painting Chloe, created in 1875 by French artist Jules Lefebvre, which has hung at Young and Jackson Hotel since 1909, is a much-loved Melbourne cultural icon. Chloe has been the subject of controversy and mythologising, particularly in relation to the Parisian model who sat for the painting. This production-based thesis, through a work of historical fiction and an exegesis, imaginatively renders and recontextualises Lefebvre’s Chloe to illustrate how these myths have, in part, contributed to reductive portrayals and interpretations of both the painting and its model.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Amendments
    MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME LIST OF AMENDMENTS Amendment In operation Brief description number from VC5 25 MAR 1999 Introduces A Code of Practice for Telecommunications Facilities in Victoria, and updates Code of Practice – Private Tennis Court Development as incorporated documents, amends the gaming provisions to provide for lists of strip shopping centres where gaming is prohibited, recognises existing use rights of privatised utility service providers, defines “Railway station”, provides for vegetation removal if the vegetation has been planted for pasture or other crops, formatting and other changes arising from panel reports and operational experience. C1 30 APR 1999 Amends the Melbourne Docklands Area Planning Provisions incorporated document to introduce noise and light regime requirements for the Business Park Precinct of Melbourne Docklands and amends provisions including building height, building setbacks and land use to reflect the proposed development of the Precinct. C2 25 MAY 1999 Amends HO 422, Map 12HO to delete Building 16 & Ward 22 of the Alfred Hospital site and includes the former Royal Park Psychiatric Hospital within the Heritage Overlay HO 325, Map 2HO. C3 24 JUN 1999 The amendment corrects anomalies within the Incorporated Document – Melbourne Docklands Area Planning Provisions which refer to obsolete sections of the former Melbourne Planning Scheme, introduces a revised setback provision in all development precincts and updates the heritage provisions applying to the Victoria Harbour Precinct. C6 22 JUL 1999 The
    [Show full text]
  • Murdoch University Katy Watson-Kell Reimagining a Melbourne Icon
    Watson-Kell Reimagining a Melbourne icon Murdoch University Katy Watson-Kell Reimagining a Melbourne icon: Jules Lefebvre’s Chloe Abstract: Created in 1875 by French artist Jules Lefebvre, the nude painting Chloe has been the star attraction at Melbourne’s Young and Jackson Hotel for over a century. While researching my novel-in-progress Capturing Chloe, I unearthed new information which richly informs the characters in my novel. This paper will juxtapose Irish writer George Moore’s memoir The End of Marie Pellegrin, and an 1876 interview with Lefebvre by art critic Lucy Hooper, to explore the identity of the model ‘Marie’ who allegedly sat for Chloe. I will argue that Lefebvre’s muse may have been Marie Pellegrin, a beautiful card-playing rebel who not only loved the voyous of Montmartre, but was also the intimate friend of Victorine Meurent, the model for Manet’s Olympia (1863). According to art historian Eunice Lipton, Meurent was a student at the Académie Julian in 1875 where Lefebvre tutored George Moore in life drawing. It was an oppressive period in Paris, particularly for the women of Montmartre who were pilloried for their pivotal role in the Paris Commune (1871). In his Lucy Hooper interview, Lefebvre claimed his model was ‘in the hands of a gang of low confederates’. Could Marie have been a teenage Communard, a rifle- toting petroleuse living in fear under President MacMahon’s regime of ‘Moral Order’ following the oppression of the Commune? By challenging mythologies which neglect the political, social and artistic milieu in Paris leading up to Chloe’s creation, this paper shines new light on Lefebvre’s masterpiece and the multifarious life, and ultimate fate, of his young Parisian model.
    [Show full text]
  • Report to the Future Melbourne (Planning) Committee Agenda Item 6.2
    Page 1 of 5 Report to the Future Melbourne (Planning) Committee Agenda item 6.2 Heritage Victoria Referral: HV-2019-16 5 March 2019 2-20 Swanston Street, Melbourne (Federation Square) Presenter: Evan Counsel, Acting Manager Planning and Building Purpose and background 1. The purpose of this report is to advise the Future Melbourne Committee that Heritage Victoria has referred an Application for Heritage Permit affecting the land known as Federation Square (refer attachment 2 – Locality Plan) to the Melbourne City Council for comment. The application seeks permission to demolish the Yarra building and construct a new building (to be used as an Apple Global Flagship store). The proposal is consistent with Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C314. 2. The applicant is Federation Square Pty Ltd c/o- Urbis Pty Ltd, the owner is Federation Square Pty Ltd, the architect is Foster + Partners Pty Ltd and the landscape architect is Oculus Pty Ltd. 3. On 1 August 2018 the Executive Director of Heritage Victoria accepted a nomination for Federation Square to be included on the Victorian Heritage Register (VHR). While this nomination is being considered Federation Square is currently included on the Victorian Heritage Register. On 10 December 2018, the Future Melbourne Committee resolved to support the Executive Director of Heritage Victoria’s nomination to include Federation Square on the VHR. Key issues 4. The key matters for consideration are restricted to heritage only and include any relevant local heritage controls and whether the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) or a local planning policy specifically mentions or relates to the registered place or the area.
    [Show full text]
  • WOMEN's MELBOURNE Celestina Sagazio
    WOMEN'S MELBOURNE Celestina Sagazio Copyright © National Trust, 2010 The National Trust of Australia (Victoria) Tasma Terrace 4 Parliament Place East Melbourne, Victoria, 3002 This project was supported by the City of Melbourne Writing About Melbourne Arts Grant Program. The project was also supported by the Heritage Victoria Heritage Grants Program and the Helen Macpherson Smith Trust. ISBN 978-1-86364-023-7 Women’s Melbourne 1 2711 • Women's Melbourne_B5.indd 1 19/03/10 8:58 AM 2 Women’s Melbourne 2711 • Women's Melbourne_B5.indd 2 19/03/10 8:58 AM CONTENTS Acknowledgements 4 Access to Places on the Tours 5 Foreword 6 Introduction 7 A Short History of Women in Melbourne 8 Tour Maps 13 Tour 1: City North 23 Tour 2: City South 39 Tour 3: East Melbourne (Part 1) 63 Tour 4: East Melbourne (Part 2) 79 Select Bibliography 92 Notes 95 Women’s Melbourne 3 2711 • Women's Melbourne_B5.indd 3 19/03/10 8:58 AM Associate Professor Renate Howe of Deakin University, the ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS National Trust’s Architectural Historian, Rohan Storey, and Sylvia Black of the East Melbourne Historical Society, read the This book has been a labour of love. I have been collecting manuscript and made many useful suggestions. But any errors information on women’s sites for many years, and it has been or omissions are my responsibility. a thrill to write about women’s historic places and share with others the fascinating stories of many truly remarkable women This publication would not have been possible without the who have helped make Melbourne the great city it is.
    [Show full text]
  • Report to the Future Melbourne (Planning) Committee Agenda Item 6.5
    Page 1 of 156 Report to the Future Melbourne (Planning) Committee Agenda item 6.5 Planning Scheme Amendment C376: Sustainable Building Design 15 September 2020 Presenter: Emma Appleton, Director City Strategy Purpose and background 1. The purpose of this report is to present sustainable building design standards (the Standards) and recommend that the Future Melbourne Committee request authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit Planning Scheme Amendment C376 (refer Attachment 2). In addition, an alternative implementation pathway is recommended for the Standards through introduction of a Victorian Planning Provision with a local schedule (refer Attachment 3), and endorsement by the Future Melbourne Committee is sought to formally advocate to the Victorian Government to adopt a state-wide approach. 2. On 16 July 2019, Melbourne City Council declared a climate and biodiversity emergency, recognising that temperature rise above 1.5°C would cause major and irreversible damage to the city and its ecosystem. On 19 February 2020, the Future Melbourne Committee endorsed 10 priority actions in response to the climate and biodiversity emergency including supporting an accelerated pathway to zero emissions by 2040. Action 6.5 determined to: ‘Mandate greening and zero emissions buildings through the Planning Scheme’. 3. Australia’s emissions per capita are higher than any of its key trading partners. Domestically, Melbourne sits alongside Brisbane as the two highest emitting capital cities. Locally, buildings account for approximately two-thirds of municipal emissions. To reduce emissions in Melbourne, buildings need to be designed and built better, be more efficient and incorporate green infrastructure. 4. The Standards will apply to new buildings in the City of Melbourne as well as alterations and additions that meet a certain size threshold.
    [Show full text]